Cognitive Level Analysis of Comprehension Questions in the English Entrance Exam Based on Barrett’s Taxonomy (A Decade-long Study)

Tusi Nasrabadi, Mohammadreza; Moinifar, Avin; Asadi, Tara

doi:10.22034/emes.2025.2066519.2665

Cognitive Level Analysis of Comprehension Questions in the English Entrance Exam Based on Barrett’s Taxonomy (A Decade-long Study)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Mohammadreza Tusi Nasrabadi ¹

Avin Moinifar ²

Tara Asadi ³

¹ Assistant professor ; Department of English language teaching, Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran

² Teacher, Ministry of Education, Sardasht, Iran

³ Teacher, Education Department, Saqez, Iran

10.22034/emes.2025.2066519.2665

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to analyze the cognitive levels of reading comprehension questions in the English section of Iran’s National Entrance Examination (Konkur) over the past decade (2015–2024) based on Barrett’s Taxonomy. The research focused on determining the extent to which the exam questions address both lower-order thinking skills (LOTS) and higher-order thinking skills (HOTS).
Methods: This study was an applied one and was conducted using a descriptive-analytical method with a content analysis approach. The research population included all reading comprehension questions from the national exams conducted between 2015 and 2024. Using census sampling, a total of 166 questions from 11 exams were analyzed. A coding checklist was developed based on Barrett’s five cognitive levels: declarative, reorganizing, referential, evaluative, and perceptual. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, tables, and graphs.
Results: The results showed that questions at the expressive level were the most frequent (an average of about 37%), while the comprehension level was completely omitted in most years. Reference and evaluation level questions showed relative growth, which can be considered as a sign of a gradual move towards higher-level thinking skills (2020–2024). However, the distribution of questions was still skewed in favor of lower cognitive levels.
Conclusion: The findings suggest that reading comprehension questions in Iran’s university entrance exam have predominantly targeted lower cognitive levels over the past decade, with insufficient emphasis on analytical, evaluative, and affective dimensions of reading. These results are consistent with the findings of international studies. It is suggested that the design of questions be revised to create greater alignment with the goals of the national curriculum by maintaining a balance in cognitive levels and paying attention to high-level emotional skills.

Keywords

Keywords: Reading Comprehension

Konkur

Barrett&‌rsquo؛ s Taxonomy

Cognitive Levels

Higher-Order Thinking Skills

Test Analysis

Subjects

Measuring in Higher Education

References

Amalya, F. R., Anugerahwati, M., & Yaniafari, R. S. (2020). An analysis of reading comprehension questions in the Bright coursebook based on Barrett’s taxonomy. JET (Journal of English Teaching), 6(1), 33–42. https://doi.org/10.33541/jet.v6i1.1554

Anderson, N. J. (2003).Teaching reading. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Practical English Language Teaching (pp. 67–86). McGraw-Hill

Aqeel, F. S., & Farrah, M. (2019) .Teachers and students’ perceptions about higher order thinking skills and reading comprehension: A case study. International Journal of English Language & Literature Studies, 8(4), 143–160)https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.23.2019.84.143.160)

Barrett, T. C. (1976). Taxonomy of reading comprehension. In R. C. Smith (Ed.), Handbook of Reading Research. New York, DE: International Reading Association.

Berelson, B. (1952). Content Analysis in Communication Research. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

Day, R. R., & Park, J. S. (2005). Developing reading comprehension questions. Reading in a Foreign Language, 17(1), 60–73. https://nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl/April2005/day/day.html

Mirzaei, A., Hashemian, M., & Tanbakooei, N. (2013). Exploring negative washback of Konkoor in Iranian EFL classes and critiquing different stakeholders’ accountability and reproductive/transformative practices. Journal of Foreign Language Research, 3(2), 381–409 https://doi.org/10.22059/jflr.2013.57278 [In persian]

Farhady, H. (2006). Reflections on and directions for English language teaching in Iran. English Language Teaching in Iran: Policy and Practice, 3(4), 3–17. (https://tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume13/ej52/ej52a1/) [In persian]

Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & Perencevich, K. C. (2013). Motivating Reading Comprehension: Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410609199

Harmer, J. (2000). How to teach English. Longman.

Jahangard, A. (2007). Evaluation of the EFL materials taught at Iranian public high schools. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 9(2), 130–150. (https://www.asian-efl-journal.com/June_2007_EBook_editions.pdf) [In persian]

Junaidi, E. (2024). Exploring effective reading tasks for senior high school: Addressing key gaps using Barrett’s taxonomy. ELSYA: Journal of English Language Studies, 6(2), 110–125. https://journal.unilak.ac.id/index.php/elsya/article/view/23387 [In persian]

Khadka, J., Dahal, N., Acharya, U., Puri, G., Subedi, N., & Hasan, M. K. (2025). Higher-order thinking skills in e-learning contexts in higher education: A phenomenological study. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1555541. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1555541

Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Krismadayanti, R., & Zainil, Y. (2022). An analysis of students’ reading comprehension level using Barrett’s taxonomy. Journal of English Language Teaching, 11(3), 442–453. https://doi.org/10.24036/jelt.v11i3.116776

Mukhlis, M. (2023). Higher order thinking skills in reading literacy questions. Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics, 8(1), 55–70. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1413369.pdf

Nasri, N., Biria, R., & Karimi, L. (2022). Reading comprehension tasks in Iranian high school textbooks: A Barrett taxonomy perspective. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 12(1), 67–76. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1201.08 [In persian]

Nehari, M., Bouhassoun, M., & Kantaoui, M. (2024). Evaluation of Arabic language textbooks in Algeria based on Barrett’s taxonomy. International Journal of Language Education, 8(2), 112–123. https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v8i2.26471

Rahma, D. N. (2019). Analysis of reading comprehension questions made by the teacher at SMAN 2 Sidoarjo based on Barrett’s taxonomy. (Undergraduate thesis). UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya. http://digilib.uinsby.ac.id/id/eprint/28261

Razmjoo, S. A., & Kazempourfard, E. (2012). On the relationship between language proficiency and performance on Cloze Tests: Evidence from Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Linguistics, 4(3), 12–24. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v4i3.1841 [In persian]

Sousa, D. A., & Meyer, R. E. (2020). How the brain learns to read. Corwin Press. https://us.corwin.com/en-us/nam/how-the-brain-learns-to-read/book272585